Limitations

The use of a qualitative (or interpretive) method presents challenges with regards to reliability and validity. One of the treats to the validity of qualitative research is that it tends to be anecdotal in its approach to the use of data in relation to conclusions and explanations (Silverman, 2000). In order to achieve validity, it was important that I overcame the

temptation to jump to easy conclusions because there was some evidence which was leading me in an interesting direction. I avoided this by testing the emerging themes through a constant comparative method which I outlined above in the analysis section.

Interviews held with students adjacent to the staff room may have affected the quality of the data because I felt at times student participants were ‘holding back’ in terms of voice level and freedom of expression. Students were much more vociferous in the focus group setting. However, I felt that interviews held in the room adjacent to the staff room provided

sufficiently honest data which was cross-checked with other interview data.

A limitation of being a teacher/researcher is that students arguably saw me as an authoritative and powerful figure. As a result they might have felt compelled to participate or thought they were giving the type of information that can be used against them in the future. I already had trusting relationships with the pupils at my workplace and ensured that steps were taken at the other school to gain the trust of the participants. I ensured that all the pupils had freely

consented to take part, were informed about the nature of the research, and were kept informed at all stages. I also reassured the pupils that they were co-researcher rather than having research carried out on them. As an African-Caribbean researcher I acknowledged my

experiences, values and assumptions which might introduce bias and affect the direction of the research. Although I had a good rapport with students and parents and was sensitive to their experiences and views, it was important that I explored all possible meanings and different perspectives from all of the data. During interviews I asked open questions and avoided showing signs of approval or disapproval to responses. At times I had to separate myself from ‘being African-Caribbean’ to ensure that the extent of my passion for the topic was not seen by the respondents. I had to detach myself from the data for small periods and return to the material later in order to find elements overlooked in my first investigation.

Conducting research in a school setting can put pressure on student participants as they may view teachers as experts and powerful figures. Being aware of this, I took steps to address the power imbalance which often occur when conducting research with young people. According to Delpit (1988), the teacher’s personal power as experts can be dis-empowering to students since it may not only deny them access to the codes of the culture of power considered necessary for academic success but also the opportunity to be their own ‘experts’ regarding discussions, discourses and instructions that is in their best interest. She comments that ‘we must keep the perspective that people are experts on their own lives’ (Delpit, 1988:297). It was therefore important while interviewing students that I acknowledged my position of power and ‘cease to exist’ for a moment in order to allow students to express alternative views and interpretations on issues pertaining to themselves.

Delpit (1988) also claimed that many black pupils expect authority figures to act

authoritatively. As a result they may feel inhibited in expressing their views. Conversely, when teachers act like friends, the message that may be sent to them is that the teacher is

‘weak’ and has no authority and the children may act accordingly, for example, they may disobey the teacher’s instructions (Delpit, 1988). I believe that being a friendly teacher who have good relationships with students aided in drawing the students in and allowed them a greater freedom of expression than would otherwise be the case. I have also found that the adoption a non-authoritarian approach to my teaching is not done at the expense of my classroom management. I believe that this helped them to feel comfortable and to freely express themselves, thus giving quality data (Shaw et. al., 2011). I tried to ensure that the interview room was as informal as possible and I dressed in ‘smart casual’ clothing for interviews.

Interviews with teachers in the staff room and library could have had an impact on the data as the library was a public space and might have presented problems regarding confidentiality. However, there were no major interruptions in the staffrooms and the sixth-form students in the library were studying at a sufficient distance away that they were unable to listen in. Teachers in the staffroom seemed relaxed during the interview process but I felt slightly uneasy when a teacher came into the staffroom and looked over inquiringly. The decision to have interviews with teachers in the staffroom was a mutual one. After I spoke to the teacher respondents about the content of the interview schedule I asked them to suggest an interview location where they felt comfortable to speak freely. I suggested several potential sites such as classrooms, the staffroom, the library and the school canteen. Some teachers decided on being interviewed in their classroom while others chose the staffroom.

The interview setting at Angelo Supplementary School was altogether different to the settings at the secondary schools. The layout at the supplementary school was informal and the

students and staff appeared to be more informed about the research and enthusiastic about it. The atmosphere seemed to allow a greater confidence and freedom of expression compared to the secondary schools. Comparing data from the supplementary school with the data collected at the secondary schools helped to improve the reliability of the data. I met with students in the secondary schools on two occasions and the supplementary school on one occasion. On the second occasion secondary schools students had the opportunity to give additional information which they recalled at a later date. I met with some secondary school students three times- the third was for the focus group.

The limitations of using a focus group is that the data collected are more difficult to organise in terms of getting the participants to turn up at the same time as well as having elements of group effects. It was important that as moderator, I made it clear that everyone's views were equally important (Bryman, 2004). It was also difficult to the transcribe audio-recordings because of the persistence of participants talking at the same time. I used a combination of audio-tape and field notes.

A limitation of this research is that it is a small-scale study and may lack generalisability. However, the group which I chose to sample was relevant to my research questions, the theoretical underpinning of the research and the understandings and accounts that I was developing (Mason, 1996). I also chose the research settings which contained the phenomenon being investigated. Therefore, the accounts, analysis, and findings of this research may be generalised to similar educational settings.

One of the advantages of being a teacher/researcher is that I brought to the research a nuanced understanding of the respondents’ backgrounds and the school context. I had an in-depth awareness of the data which an outside researcher cannot possibly match. It was also easier for me to gain access and permission from pupils, teachers and parents to participate.